The home secretary, David Blunkett's plans to introduce a national scheme of identity cards have been held up by objections from leading cabinet members, including Peter Hain, the leader of the Commons, Patricia Hewitt, the trade secretary, and Charles Clarke, the education secretary.

While several ministers are still concerned about the principle of the scheme, the debate has also turned to practical difficulties, including the likely £40 per person charge and 10-13 years it would take to bring into operation.

Mr Blunkett had wanted to deliver an upbeat report on progress to the Commons this week but was told to hold back after a wide-ranging cabinet discussion last week.

Some cabinet sources said the government's unpopularity made it impossible to impose a £40 charge for a card intended only to cut social security fraud.

Mr Blunkett also came up against principled objections from ministers alarmed by the scale of intrusion implicit in the government's most grandiose version of the plan.

The ministers are still worried by the plans for ID cards to be based on biometric information, such as fingerprint or eye scanning, requiring 40m Britons to go to kiosks to have their biometric information recorded. They also warn that the scheme will not be a short-cut solution to curbing illegal asylum seekers.

The Treasury is concerned to make sure it does not bear the £1.8bn cost.

MPs on the Commons home affairs are to examine the proposal's practical difficulties. Polls show public support for a scheme, but widespread resentment that it will be accompanied by huge disruption.

The prime minister, who remains an enthusiast for identity cards, signalled yesterday to a private meeting of Labour MPs that he will press ahead with fresh asylum legislation. It will focus on making it a presumption to reject an application if the claimant has lost or destroyed his identity papers.

Mr Blair, who allowed last week's cabinet meeting to have a wide-ranging debate on ID cars, has let it be known that he is keen to allow full cabinet discussions on a range of other domestic issues as part of a change of style.

The chancellor has made clear his lack of enthusiasm for the scheme, but says it can go ahead as long as the Treasury does not have to foot the bill. ID card enthusiasts know that charging everyone £40 is not an attractive option and are floating the idea that the Whitehall departments that will benefit most, such as social security and health, should foot part of the bill.

The cabinet last week decided to ask its domestic affairs committee to take a further look at the technical questions such as eyescans and other biometric security measures. The committee is chaired by John Prescott, who is also reported to have strong reservations about the scheme.

No cabinet member said they were against ID cards on principle during last week's meeting, but questioned whether the paving legislation was really a priority for this year's Queen's speech, voiced fears it would get bogged down in opposition in the House of Lords, or questioned the cost.

Mr Blunkett, however, can rely upon the enthusiastic support of the health secretary, John Reid, who sees ID cards as a vital tool in tackling the problem of "health tourism" without having to persuade NHS staff to act as immigration officers.

The work and pensions secretary, Andrew Smith, is also a strong supporter on the grounds that it will go some way to tackling illegal working and benefit fraud. Mr Blunkett has already sugested that the cost of the card could be paid in instalments and that elderly people would not have to renew their cards. But he told MPs on the home affairs committee last week that the government had to decide soon whether to defer the legislation.

The shadow home secretary, Oliver Letwin, has said he supports benefit entitlement cards which simply prove who people are, but is highly sceptical about the need for an identity card.

But the Police Federation has come out strongly in support, arguing that ID cards should be introduced on a voluntary basis but made mandatory as the level of public support increases.